CLEARLAKE, Calif. – The Clearlake City Council on Thursday night gave unanimous approval to a first reading of a new ordinance to establish rules for medical marijuana cultivation.
The proposed ordinance mirrors a county ordinance implemented last year, prohibiting grows on vacant parcels.
It suggests plant limits on residential parcels ranging from six plants on parcels of half an acre or less up to 48 plants on 40 acres or more; prohibits growing in mobile home parks – unless specified garden areas are designated – and multifamily dwellings; requires grows be screened from view; and requires processing amounts to match the number of plants that can be grown on parcels where the processing is taking place.
The approval followed a council discussion and only a small amount of public comment. The main concern from a couple who use the plant to manage pain and other health issues was that the plant limits don’t allow them to grow enough to use the plant in edibles.
City Manager Joan Phillipe introduced the ordinance, and told the council she received two communications from community members about it. One supported it, another, from Lower Lake attorney Ron Green, pointed out a need for clarification in wording regarding a proposed 10-foot setback on the smallest parcels.
Phillipe also explained that the Clearlake Planning Commission had recommended the council approve the ordinance at its May 7 meeting.
The commission had proposed some changes, including adding complaint-driven language that is broadened to include the ability for enforcement outside of complaints; reducing setbacks on parcels smaller than half an acre to 10 feet from the property line rather than 25 feet; and including daycare centers in the definition of “school” facilities.
The document said that cultivation within 600 feet of a public or private school is prohibited, and the suggestion to add private daycares to the school definition was an issue for Mayor Jeri Spittler.
She said the large distance requirement was a problem because it meant that if such a daycare opened in a residential area, it would prevent people from growing the marijuana they needed for health issues.
Spittler suggested that “activists” who oppose use of the drug could go around opening daycare centers to prevent marijuana growing.
The question of private daycare centers and distance from growing activity proved the main area of concern during the discussion.
Council member Denise Loustalot said the distance requirement was meant to help buffer schools and other areas where children frequented from the crimes that come to areas associated with marijuana growing.
In response to Spittler’s concerns about activists opening daycare centers, Council member Gina Fortino Dickson pointed out that licensed daycare providers must meet state requirements.
There were proposals to reduce the distance requirement, however, the council ultimately removed the reference to private daycares from the ordinance’s definition of schools.
The council approved the planning commission’s other proposed changes, including the setback reduction from 25 to 10 feet on smaller parcels and the complaint driven language.
At Fortino Dickson’s suggestion, the council also added a requirement that the person with the medical marijuana recommendation live at the residence where the marijuana is grown.
Luiz moved to approve the ordinance’s first reading, which was approved 5-0.
The council will hold its second and final reading of the ordinance at its June 13 meeting.
Email Elizabeth Larson at
How to resolve AdBlock issue? 
